SYMBOL, MYTH, AND THE BIBLICAL REVELATION AVERY ...

16 THEOLOGICAL STUDIES
Closely linked with the absolute sovereignty of Yahweh is the fact
that the Bible disavows all nature religion. Barth is fundamentally
right in holding that the Bible deals from first to last with God's historical
action. Not everything in the Bible is history in the modern
and technical understanding of the term; much of it is rather saga,
i.e., a poetic and divinatory elaboration on history. 32 But saga, like
history, claims to deal with unique and unrepeatable events, whereas
myth does not intend to be, but merely pretends to be, history. 33 The
creation account in Genesis, far from falling in the same category as
the Babylonian cosmogonies, may be viewed as a polemic against them.
According to Barth, it asserts precisely what myth cannot grasp,
namely, the transcendent and creative act whereby God gave the
universe an absolute beginning. 34
The central faith of Israel undoubtedly rests not upon mythological
construction but upon a privileged religious experience giving the
people and its religious leaders a singularly vivid knowledge of Yahweh
as Lord of the universe. This insight issued in firm doctrinal affirmations,
in exclusive claims, and in a demand for total commitment—
responses in no way required by a myth, which can coexist quite contentedly
beside its own contrary. 35
Since their essential faith was nourished by something quite different
from myth, it is not surprising that the Israelites produced no mythology
of their own. They did, however, borrow from the mythologies
of the surrounding peoples, and in some cases subjected these to a
process of demythologizing which is at best relatively complete. For
example, in various references to the creation, we find allusions to
mighty struggles between Yahweh and mysterious monsters such as
Leviathan and Rahab (e.g., Ps 73/74, Ps 88/89, Is 27, Job 9, Job 20). 36
What have we here if not a mythical representation—not false but not
fully translated into doctrinal terms—of the ceaseless conflict between
Yahweh and the powers of evil? In other passages, such as the mention
32 Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics 3/1 (Edinburgh, 1938) 83.
33 Ibid. 1/1 (Edinburgh, 1936) 376.
34 Ibid. 3/1,84^-90.
36 This point is well made by H. Fries, "Mythos und Offenbarung," in J. Feiner et al.
(ed.), Fragen der Theologie heute (Einsiedeln, 1957) p. 39.
86 J. L. McKenzie has assembled a collection of OT passages of this type in THEOLOGICAL
STUDIES 11 (1950) 275-82. For his present judgment on their mythical character, see
art. cit., (supra n. 11) p. 193.